Transcript Document

NCAA Enforcement:
How to Conduct a
Campus Investigation
2014 NCAA Regional Rules Seminars
Session Overview
Purpose:
Discuss strategies and methods that institutions may use when
investigating NCAA rules violations on campus, including
suggestions for gathering documents, conducting interviews
and working with the NCAA enforcement staff.
Outline:
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
Creating an Institutional Investigative Policy
Launching an Investigation
Analysis of Information
Interactions with the Enforcement Staff
Conclusion
Creating an Institutional
Investigative Policy
Institutional Investigative Policy
• Develop guidelines and criteria used in determining when an
inquiry is initiated.
• Define roles and responsibilities.
• Outline investigative resources (e.g., interview notice form,
statement of confidentiality, etc.).
• Create procedures (roadmap) for reporting institutional findings
and violations.
NCAA Bylaws 2.1.1 and 2.8.1
Why is this Important?
• Promotes consistency/transparency in investigations.
• Provides for a timely and organized response to
potential violations.
• Reduces inefficiencies and helps maintain the integrity
of the investigation.
• Lack of policy may lead to questions of failure to
monitor and/or institutional control.
• Committee on Infractions (COI) may inquire as to the
institutional policy and protocol or the lack thereof.
Launching an Investigation
Houston We Have a Problem:
Launching an Investigation
• Developing a Case Strategy (Game Plan)
o Mobilize investigative team, as outlined in the institutional
investigative policy.
o Review roles and responsibilities.
o Identify issues (e.g., eligibility) and applicable NCAA legislation.
o Consult with institutional counsel, conference office, etc.
o Investigate violation(s).
 Two main investigative tools:
• Document Requests
• Interviews
 Gathering documentation in relation to timing of interviews.
Document Collection
• Document requests:
oShould be made in writing.
oShould include an estimated date of production.
oDetermine which releases, if any, are necessary.
oDetermine when and who will request documentation.
oFormat in which documents collected and/or stored (i.e.,
PDF, Excel spreadsheet, etc.).
oRealize in advance that document requests may tip others off
to your investigation.
Possible Documents/Information
to Collect
• Computer records
o Emails
o Computer hard drives*
• Phone records
o Land line
o Cellular*
o Text Messages*
*Institutional and/or personal accounts and devices
• Financial Records
o Bank statements
o Credit/debit cards
o Wire transfer records
o Receipts
• Travel Records
o Travel itineraries and receipts
o Hotel/lodging records
Possible Documents/Information
to Collect
• Academic records
o Transcripts/enrollment history
o Standardized testing scores
o Professors’ grade records
o Academic assistance records
• Social Media
o Facebook
o Twitter
o Instagram
• Vehicle Information
o Registration/insurance
documentation
o Driver’s license
• Releases/authorizations
Who Should be Interviewed?
• Source of violation.
• Individual(s) with potential knowledge of and/or involvement in
the violations.
• Institutional staff member(s), outside of athletics, with
knowledge of departmental processes potentially involved in
the violation (i.e., financial aid, registrar, admissions, etc.).
• Individual(s) who is/are potentially "at risk" for involvement in
the violations.
• Note – Individuals who are or may be “at risk” should not be
involved in the planning and execution of the investigation.
Potential Interviewees and the
Cooperative Principle
Who has to cooperate?
• Institutional staff
o Professors
o Teaching Assistants
o Academic Counselors/Tutors
• Athletics staff (former and current)
o Coaches (full-time, part-time and voluntary)
o Graduate Assistants
• Student-Athletes
o Prospective student-athletes
Potential Interviewees and the
Cooperative Principle
Who doesn’t have to cooperate?
• Parents of student-athletes
oLegal guardians
• Third Parties
oAgents
oRunners
oFinancial Advisors
oAthletic sponsors
•
•
•
•
Business People
High School Coaches
Former Student-Athletes
Representatives of athletics
interests (Boosters)*
Considerations when determining
the order of the interviews
• Who has the information?
• Who can corroborate/refute information?
• Who is at risk?
• How to best prevent/minimize breaches and
leaks.
oConsecutive or simultaneous interviews.
• Generally, work from the outside in.
Interview Logistics
• Review institutional investigative policy to determine:
o Who will conduct interviews?
o Who may be present in interviews?
o Will institution retain outside counsel?
o Where to conduct interviews? (e.g., neutral setting vs.
accommodating interviewee).
o How will the interviews be performed? (e.g., telephone or in
person).
 At-risk individuals: interview in person.
 If information is significant: interview in person.
o
How will interviews be arranged? (e.g., cold call vs.
prearranged).
 Suspect non-cooperative: cold call.
 To avoid talking with other witnesses: cold call.
Interview Logistics (cont’d.)
•
Explain the purpose of the interview – To determine knowledge of or involvement
in violations. Do not specify the substance of the interview.
•
State on the record the name of the person interviewed, date, time, location and
individuals present.
•
Review the obligation to be truthful and forthcoming [NCAA Bylaws 10.01 and
10.1] and ramifications for not being truthful [NCAA Bylaw 10.4].
•
Review interviewee’s right to have legal counsel present during interview.
•
Review investigative procedures as outlined in NCAA Bylaws 19 (Division I) and 32
(Divisions II and III).
•
Be cognizant that additional issues may arise during the course of your interviews.
•
Memorialize each interview (i.e., audio recording, transcript, written interview
summary, etc.)
Effective Interviewing Techniques
•
Perform research and gather relevant documentation in advance of
interview.
• Ask open-ended questions.
o The best information is a narrative response.
o Interviewee should do the majority of the talking.
o Begin questions with a verb or command word.
• Pause to elicit more information.
o Avoid interruptions.
 Increases opportunity for obtaining more information.
 Silence is okay.
Effective Interviewing
Techniques (cont’d.)
• Ask specific questions and get as many details as possible (e.g.,
dates, times, names, etc.).
• Have interviewee distinguish between first hand information and
second hand information.
• Solicit information from interviewee about others who may have
information.
• Paraphrase responses to determine accuracy of the information.
Analysis of Information
Analysis of Information
•
•
•
•
•
The administrator(s) responsible for evaluating information should be
identified in the institutional policy.
Review information gathered from interviews and documents.
o Analyze to determined whether additional interview(s) or document
request(s) are necessary.
o Detect any outstanding issues and follow up.
Must identify the violation level.
o Level I through IV (Division I): NCAA Bylaws 19.1.1 through 19.1.4
o Major or Secondary (Divisions II and III): NCAA Bylaws 19.02.2.1 through
19.02.2.2
Identify eligibility issues.
o If any exist, contact NCAA Student-Athlete Reinstatement staff.
o Institutional Responsibility [NCAA Bylaw 14.01.1].
Analyzing information is ongoing throughout the life of the investigation.
Review of Compliance Systems
• Make honest, candid assessments.
• Identify potential breakdowns.
• Implement meaningful corrective actions.
• Revise and update institutional investigative policy, if necessary.
Interactions with the
Enforcement Staff
Enforcement Staff Interaction
During the Investigation
•
Contact the enforcement staff whenever guidance is needed.
•
Enforcement staff may join the investigation or allow the institution
to continue inquiry on its own.
•
Early contact may avoid duplicative efforts.
•
Enforcement staff may have additional information regarding
potential violations.
•
Enforcement staff may have additional techniques or resources.
Enforcement Staff Interaction
Reporting the Violations
• Reporting Major (Level I/Level II) violations:
o Submission of a written investigative report.
o Correspondence addressed to Jon Duncan, vice
president of enforcement.
• Reporting Secondary (Level III) violations:
o Online submission through the NCAA
Requests/Self-Reports Online (RSRO) system.
Content of the Investigative Report
• Summary of the institution’s investigation.
o Nature of violation(s)/Facts of violation(s).
 Applicable legislation.
 Violation level .
• Level I through IV (Division I).
• Major or Secondary (Divisions II and III).
o Case chronology.
 How and when was violation discovered?
 By whom?
o Interviews conducted.
• Institution’s findings.
• Corrective actions.
o Include any information regarding Student-Athlete Reinstatement
action.
• Supporting documentation.
Supporting Documentation
Interviews
•
•
•
Audio recordings
Written interview
summaries and notes
Transcripts
Documents
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Computer records
Phone records
Financial Records
Travel Records
Academic records
Social Media
Vehicle Information
Conclusion
Conclusion
• Suggestions should help member institutions in handling the
"nuts and bolts" of conducting effective investigations of
potential NCAA rules violations on campuses.
• If a hearing before the Committee on Infractions is required, the
Committee will take into consideration the thoroughness of the
institution's internal investigation.
• Don't take a chance by leaving investigation methods and
strategies (or lack of) open to criticism.
Who to Contact
• If you need help or advice:
o Contact the enforcement staff.
o Contact your conference office.
o Contact the NCAA Academic & Membership Affairs
hotline 317/ 917-6003.
o Visit the NCAA website (www.ncaa.org) – follow links to
enforcement information and databases.
QUESTIONS